THE RED PILL

DIALOGUE AND DISCUSSION ON EDUCATION, ENVIRONMENT AND RACE

 

 

I am in the final days of this semester finishing up on final projects before their deadline. Last night in one of the assignments, I was answering the question: "What is coherence and why is it worth pursuing?" As with everything now (I am looking to take this even further), when approached with a problem, I go to the Etymology. In Artificial Intelligence (also implied in practically every Object Oriented Program), there is a "thing" called "The Rumpelstiltskin Principle." It basically states that nothing (no-thing) has power until it has a name. In My Practice, I add: "What is a name, but a word." I Love Etymology.

I say that to say this: below is My Answer to the question above ("What is coherence and why is it worth pursuing?"). Just a moment ago I thought to dissect My Name in the same fashion. Does it really work this way?

"Breaking down the etymology "coherence" leaves the prefix "co- (com-)= with/together/joint," "her (abbreviation for "herald") = trace lineage/approach," and the suffix "-ence = action or process." Putting that all together, I would define "coherence" as "approaching together (joint approach)." The book describes coherence "as a minimum, all projects are part of some overall plan for the organization and form a recognizable contribution to that plan." Coherence is worth pursuing in order to ensure each of the individual elements of your project come together forming a single completed project; a gestalt meshing with ease."

Views: 19

Comment

You need to be a member of THE RED PILL to add comments!

Join THE RED PILL

© 2017   Created by Adisa.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service